Rat,
If you want to talk semantics, you are just as guilty as I. Your very first post was 'NASCAR is the least interesting of all the racing' followed by the puking smiley. You didn't qualify it by adding IMO or the like.
You then proceeded to follow up by stating every NASCAR stereo type there is...people go to see the wrecks etc. I'll give you credit for at least qualifying those w/ IMHO.
I don't want to get into a pissing match, but those were surely thinly veiled digs and you are a good 'bait and switcher'. Again, IMHO, of course.
The reason you see all the regulation is that they are trying keep the 'spirit' of the moniker 'stock car' racing. They don't allow every souped up, concept engine or new fangled idea to be placed in/on the cars in order to keep the series from becoming a Formua 1. The costs to field a Cup or Busch team are already astronomical as it is...an you imagine if they opened it up to be a technology race?
They even took away Pettys Superbird because he kept lapping the field.
The equal playing field allows the true determining factor to be the driver...at least in theory. Either that or whoever has the most ingenious...read: sneaky...mechanic or crew chief
Sure, there really isn't much stock about a NASCAR stock car, but the fans still can identify with Taurus, Monte Carlo, Charger etc. Not necessarily so with a tricked out fin covered F1 or Indy car macine. Also, there is no computer controlled driving i.e traction control etc..Each manufacturer still uses their own variation of engine. Yes there are parameters they must follow, but it's up to the engineers to tweak it to better than the next guys w/in those parameters. And shoot, they still run with carburators.
Heck, I like all types of racing and take each for what they are. If it goes fast, I like to watch it...cars, trucks, bikes, horses, dogs...I just happen to like NASCAR best. What those guys do with those cars under racing conditions is to me, absolutely incredible.